These are the CASSE blog articles on peace.
Given his long-running obsession with GDP growth, an obsession punctuated with mid-terms in mind, President Trump has made some peculiar moves. Just this week, his stripping of immigrant truckers’ licenses took effect, as part of a broader crackdown on immigrant labor, a key source of economic growth. His hyperactive imposing of tariffs has undermined comparative advantage, a condition relied upon for global GDP growth.
As Edwin Starr once sang: “War, what is it good for?” If we’re to believe the United Kingdom’s Labour Party government, it’s good for boosting GDP and protecting your population from the existential threat of Russia.
But one thing increased militarisation most certainly isn’t good for is the environment. Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently announced his plan to steadily increase the defence budget over the next decade.
For some reason, recognizing planetary boundaries, including support for a steady state economy, is seen by some as a “progressive” cause. And granted, some steady staters and degrowthers seem to have a checklist of “progressive” causes they identify with. Perhaps adhering to these checklists helps them avoid unwanted labels.
This is a big mistake. Support for a steady state economy is no more “woke” than the laws of thermodynamics.
Six months ago, a United Nations Special Committee found that Israel’s warfare methods in Gaza were consistent with genocide. The UN defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.” The Special Committee pointed to the fact that Israel had dropped over 25,000 tonnes of explosives—equivalent to two nuclear bombs—on Gaza in just four months.
The catastrophe unfolding in Israel and the Gaza Strip is the product of many factors, including colonialism and religious fanaticism. But another impulse driving this disaster deserves discussion: competition over growth and the natural capital—particularly energy, water, and land—that ensures it. These resources provide the basis for economic and population expansion in the Middle East and elsewhere. As nations continue to recklessly pursue this expansion in a finite world we will see more and more struggles over fewer and fewer resources.
When the name “Putin” is uttered—from now until the end of human utterance—the first thing that should come to mind is hundreds of thousands (and counting) of dead and wounded. Putin has turned a verdant, peace-seeking country into a hell-scape of suffering, including starvation. Let’s not overlook the Ukrainian casualties, now or ever.
Now, Putin is taking an even deeper stride into the annals of infamy by orchestrating one of the most despicable episodes of wanton waste in history: his attack on Ukrainian grain stocks and infrastructure.
Given the recent, tragic passing of Herman Daly, we allocate this week’s Steady State Herald to the wise words of Daly himself. From 2010-2018, Herman was a regular contributor to The Daly News, CASSE’s blog before the Herald was launched. (Herman’s modesty almost prevented us from naming the blog after him, but he was outnumbered by CASSE staff and board,
Steady-state advocates know that peace is required for a stable and prosperous world. Herman Daly said, “It is hard to imagine a steady state economy without peace; it is hard to imagine peace in a full world without a steady state economy.” Brian Czech emphasized succinctly, “Peace is a steady state economy.” And peace campaigners have long connected their goals to the environment.
People tend to think of Russia as a wide-open country with plenty of space for economic growth. While it may take days to ride the trans-Siberian railway, any notion of an empty Russia is as antiquated as Dr. Zhivago. European Russia, especially, has been cultivated, harvested, logged, mined, fished, and “developed” to the gills with roads, bridges, railways, power lines, pipelines, grids, towers, cables, dams, and canals connecting every industry under the sun to thousands of towns and cities plus tens of thousands of villages.
For several weeks now, the world has been following the movement of troops on the Russia-Ukraine border with a question: What does Putin want? While the Kremlin cites potential Ukrainian membership in NATO as a casus belli, experts have been proposing alternative reasons for why Vladimir Putin wants to invade Ukraine. In a recent post, Brian Czech suggests that the most overlooked reason is the extremely fertile agricultural lands comprising much of Ukraine.